True. But I don't even know if Apple could lower the prices of their phones if they wanted to. I mean, they're barely managing to meet demand with the ASP as it is now. A cheap iPhone would wipe everything else off the map, the only issue would be that Apple would not be able to manufacture at that capacity.
Apple doesn't manufacture squat, but I think what you are saying is that China doesn't have enough employable people if Apple tried to enter the low end market... I agree.
palomine wrote: »
Who knows what Apple might do with it's cash. I can sure daydream. Maybe they will do something huge, like buy a car manufacturer and redesign bunch of carbon fiber interchangeable bodies to go on top of an all electric drive train. Buy one drive chain and pop on this years new carbon fiber sportscar body. Or mini truck. Collect them all and hang em on your garage wall The hardest part of this possibility would be the drive chain. There are others all ready with the battery-swap station infrastructure. Its not really so far out of their core competencies....
Maybe they will build their own semiconductor plant. They are probably the only company that I wouldn't be asking for a rebate from their cash hoard. Whatever they do it will be exciting to watch.
Yes, he definitely looks like Ballmer.
When you see executives like these making comments like he did, what they are really saying is "Oh sh*t! We better get our act together!"
suddenly newton wrote: »
Yeah, I'm sure the telecom industry said the same thing when Apple decided to make a phone in-house.
mcfrazieriv wrote: »
Isn't this what all the telecom companies said about apple entering a phone business?
smurfman wrote: »
If you're a dealer or salesman, you better prepare for a new career. This won't just revolutionize the car itself, but also the way people buy cars.
SpamSandwich wrote: »
Would be cool if Apple teamed up with Solar City and Musk to develop the home-scale battery technology that is to be revealed soon (this week?).
smurfman wrote: »
Marvin wrote: »
I wonder what he tells GM shareholders about the long-term prospect of being in a low-margin, heavy-manufacturing business.
They take raw aluminium and turn it into computers, they have some idea what they're getting into. They might even try to make them safer:
"The Aston Martin DB9 is a supercar known for its association with James Bond. Jony had the car delivered to New York and drove it cross-country with his dad, Mike. It cost about $250,000, but just a month after he got it, Jony wrecked the car on Interstate 280 near San Bruno. The accident nearly killed him and his commuting partner, Daniele De Iuliis, who was riding in the passenger seat.
“Jony was going pretty fast, although he said he was not going over 80 miles per hour,” said a colleague. “Something happened in the traffic. Jony lost control of the car, which went into a spin. It sling-shotted the back end, whacked into a panel truck and knocked that over, and went straight into the median. The whole car was smashed. They were lucky to get out alive. The car was a mess; totally fucked up on all sides.”
The airbags went off, filling the car with the smell of the explosive that set off the airbags. Jony found the smell unsettling as he came to. “He woke up with the smell of gunpowder in the car and that was weird. He was distressed by that,” said another source. “Ironically, the car crash alerted Apple to how important Jony is to the company and they gave him a big pay raise.”"
Sapphire car coming up.
quinney wrote: »
Why do Solar City and Musk need Apple? They are already doing it themselves.
I gotta say, as someone who has a business selling big heavy fragile products, I always thought it was genius of a company to sell millions of little gadgets with no moving parts. Little gadgets with great margins. I think it's genius. To go from that to jumping into selling heavy, fragile products and all the liabilities that go with it, and with much lower margins ...not so much.
Actually, that's one reason I can see that companies like Tesla, and potentially Apple, can go into cars. Electric cars are many times more "solid state" than traditional cars. Transportation is an industry begging to be disrupted by solid state experts like Tesla and (even more so) Apple.
Albeit another diamond filled gold leafed hairball.
Made me laugh :-)
Of which "business perspective" do you speak? I'm sure it would be interesting to hear you elaborate on this.
Do you think the automotive industry isn't subject to disruption?
Did a "business perspective" indicate Apple's entry into the "phone manufacturing" business was sensible in 2007?
Like any other perspective, a business perspective depends on where one chooses to look from.
Wow. Even totally unsubstantiated rumors Apple is building <product X> gets everyone shaking in their boots, commenting about how Apple can't do it, etc. Recent history has shown that to be unwise.
I personally believe Apple will not and is not looking into building a car (why waste the billions?). However, they do "think different" and that's what people forget.
Too Funny. This guy has an uncanny resemblance to Steve Balmer, in a number of ways. Now that I think about it, He sounds like Gates too. "No vehicle will ever need more than 350 horse power". GM, Microsoft, whats the difference? I don't like either one.